Talk:Footwear
Sneakers 'Bad'? I don't at all agree with the recent edits that sneakers have no redeeming value and should be avoided at all costs. I will agree that they are not as durable or as universal as boots, but both the depiction of them as basically always being worthless compared to boots, as well as the extra sections for boots are both areas that I am against, and am on the verge of undoing. I'll leave it there for a while in hopes of starting a discussion on this issue. There are many areas of the first paragraph that I not only dispute, but am genuinely, and non-sarcastically curious as to why anyone would make some of the claims - specifically that for general walking, they cause discomfort. I'd like to know what they offer "zero protection" from. While they are definitely not great in water long term, I've run countless times in the rain and mud, cleaned up the sneakers, and they've lasted me till they were basically falling apart. In fact, I've always gotten Nikes, one of the less durable and more fashionable brands, and I've never had a pair that I've had to get rid of for practical or functional reasons - they just get too ugly first. But I, along with most athletes that run or train can tell you that unless you are frequently in very wet terrain - mud or rain up to the ankles - most sneakers will last months, if not years, with minimal maintenance. Boots, without proper support or added cushoning, can be detrimental to many people. The stomping is tough on the knees, hips, and back, and can have degenerative effects over time. Also, the lightweight, and low cut of sneakers offer less inhibitors to one's natural movements - you sacrifice toughness for agility. Granted, slow zombie situations don't often call for an all out sprint. But sometimes you must run to rescue someone, get help, save supplies, or pursue a rescue vehicle oblivious to your presence. If you're not knee deep in a trench, I think you'd want to be able to sprint. If your outbreak is fast zombies, I think boots would slow alot of people down (though I admit, there's no need to bring that up in the main article, lets keep types of zombies confied to their particular articles). If requested, I'll do the research and get sources for those claims against boots, but I would hope the editor in question would do likewise for his scathing review of the sneaker. Also, could you provide me with a link to what you mean by biking boots? I don't know very much about them. RE: Sneakers Hmm, I'm sorry if I came off a bit harsh. But all in all, sneakers are not good shoes to be using for a prolonged amount of time. Sure they last long, but good boots can take even more damage. I meant by water that when brine and swamp/muddy water get into the shoes, you need to take more care with them than boots when cleaning. Your sneakers are far more breathable, so the aerobic organism that cause foot disease and fabric decay have an easier time. Of course, sneakers today are getting more advanced, so I'll correct my mistakes here. Thanks.